Pope Francis creates committee for reforming the Curia

posted at 4:01 pm on April 13, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

When I covered the papal conclave last month from Rome and Vatican City, one of the most discussed topics was reform of the Vatican’s bureaucracy, called the Curia. The selection of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio of Argentine as Pope Francis was seen as a signal from the College of Cardinals that reform was high on their agenda for the near future. Today the Vatican announced that Francis has created a new commission to revise Vatican law on the Curia and institute reforms, and it’s notable for who is and is not on the panel:

Vatican City, 13 April 2013 (VIS) – Following is the full text of a communique issued today by the Secretariat of State.

“The Holy Father Francis, taking up a suggestion that emerged during the General Congregations preceding the Conclave, has established a group of cardinals to advise him in the government of the universal Church and to study a plan for revising the Apostolic Constitution on the Roman Curia, ‘Pastor Bonus’.

The group consists of:

Cardinal Giuseppe Bertello, president of the Governorate of Vatican City State;

Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga, S.D.B., archbishop of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, in the role of coordinator; and

Bishop Marcello Semeraro of Albano, Italy, in the role of secretary.

The group’s first meeting has been scheduled for 1-3 October 2013. His Holiness is, however, currently in contact with the aforementioned cardinals.”

Only one Cardinal from the Vatican itself will be in the “group,” and indeed only one other from Italy. Cardinal Pell has been outspoken on the need for reform and had stressed the need for “managerial” skills in the next papacy just before the conclave. Cardinal Monsengwo Pasinya was cited by Cardinal Francis George of Chicago just prior to the conclave as one of the leading voices for reform and evangelization. Most familiarly to Americans, Cardinal O’Malley of Boston is known for his strenuous efforts to reform his diocese after the abuse scandals, so much so that O’Malley was considered (by the media, at least) a potential contender to be the first American Pope.

Analysts have been waiting for Pope Francis to name his new Secretary of State for a signal about how aggressive he will move on Curia reform. This may be a better signal. The collection of outsiders as his advisory group for restructuring the Vatican bureaucracy certainly gives the impression that it won’t be business as usual for the Curia much longer.

At first blush, all these cardinals seem like strong personalities. Several have voiced criticisms over the years about various aspects of Vatican operations, while two, Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston and Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich, Germany, have played key roles in the church’s response to the child sexual abuse crisis.

The group’s first meeting is set for Oct. 1-3, and meanwhile, according to the Vatican statement, the pope will be in regular contact with the cardinals individually.

The brief item in the Vatican’s daily press bulletin did not explain how these cardinals were chosen, or how long they will serve in these roles.

Strikingly, there was only one member of the Roman Curia among the eight cardinals tapped to assist the pope. The rest come from various parts of the world, with at least one representing each continent.

In other words, it’s anything but a collection of insiders trying to protect the status quo. Stay tuned.

Twenty million Americans consider themselves lapsed Catholics, but Pope Francis is convincing many to test the holy waters again with his bold gestures and common touch.

After years of disenchantment with the church’s hierarchy and teachings, former members of the flock say they are willing to give the Vatican a second chance under new leadership. …

Tom Peterson, president of Catholics Come Home, which airs ads aimed at the lapsed, said his website traffic tripled the day of the election, adding several thousand visitors. It’s been double ever since.

Some interest could stem from the hubbub surrounding the selection of any pontiff, but Peterson thinks Francis’ “love for the poor and his humility is exciting people to a great extent.”

Father Peter Mussett, pastor of the St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Center, which serves the University of Colorado at Boulder, agrees.

“I had five people in a week who were saying, ‘Pope Francis has inspired me to return to my faith,'” he said. “It’s pretty remarkable.”

Brian O’Neill, 48, an Irish-American cop from Washington State, went to Catholic elementary school and a Jesuit high school but hasn’t practiced since graduating from a secular college. He says that could change soon.

Cardinal George promised in an NBC interview over a week ago that Pope Francis would bring change:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

This is fascinating. Either one is Christian/Catholic, or not. It’s pretty amazing to watch.

One can be critical without leaving.

Not arguing with anyone, just observing.

Schadenfreude on April 13, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Sigh…It is not Christian or Catholic. Catholicism is a Christian denomination. Catholics are Christians.

“Lapsed” Catholics are, generally, Catholics who no longer attend Mass or follow the Church’s teachings regularly, the same as “lapsed” Baptists or “lapsed” Lutherans who drop out of regular practice and attendance at worship but do not actively leave their faith.

“Strictly speaking, the ensemble of departments or ministries which assist the sovereign pontiff in the government of the Universal Church. These are the Roman Congregations, the tribunals, and the offices of Curia (Ufficii di Curia). The Congregations, being the highest and most extensive departments of the Pontifical Government, are treated elsewhere under ROMAN CONGREGATIONS. This article deals in particular with the tribunals and the offices of Curia (Ufficii di Curia), in addition to which something will be said of the commissions of cardinals and the pontifical family.”

A return of lapsed Catholics? I wonder whether they “lapsed” because they no longer believed in the church’s convictions or they were disgusted by a church that failed to show the courage of their conviction.
After all, it’s a church….It’s not supposed to be another WalMart!

O’Malley is a personal friend of Francis. O’Malley has a blog and mentioned that he was sitting next to Bergoglio at lunch right before he was elected. Bergoglio withdrew himself from contention in 2005 and I’m assuming that O’Malley was there to prevent a repeat of that in 2013. It is cool that he got such a big time position.

The group is interesting… Outside O’Malley, there are no big names on the council. Not only was Dolan not named (current head of the UCCB), but also no Scola (aka the guy who everyone thought would win).

A return of lapsed Catholics? I wonder whether they “lapsed” because they no longer believed in the church’s convictions or they were disgusted by a church that failed to show the courage of their conviction.
After all, it’s a church….It’s not supposed to be another WalMart!

Lew on April 13, 2013 at 4:41 PM

In Europe this began after WWII.

In America, some of them lapsed during Vatican II…The parents lapsed and so did their kids.

Some lapsed later during the scandals.

It is encouraging that more are returning and this wave began during the pontificate of John Paul II…continued with Benedict XVI and is ongoing with Francis.

I read an article today that the biggest fear of the Imams are home churches in the middle east…Could explain the increasing crackdown of persecution of christians, especially of the historic apostolic church communities throughout muslim dominant countries in the ME.

The group is interesting… Outside O’Malley, there are no big names on the council. Not only was Dolan not named (current head of the UCCB), but also no Scola (aka the guy who everyone thought would win).

Illinidiva on April 13, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Maybe Dolan is needed here to unite the USCCB as it takes on the Federales over HHS and Gay Marriage?

The Imams understand the threat that is posed, their power comes from the committed belief or cowering that it causes in its followers. They know history and saw how Christianity conquered the Roman Empire(I am using conquered loosely here in that the Elite Romans understood the force they were up against and decided for political reasons to embrace it) Plus, they remember well the crusades and how Christianity was the only religion at the time to really take them on. I continue to pray that this Pope maintains his simple ways, his humbleness has been long needed and could restore the church to its origins, where we were known for our devout faith, instead of an institutional Juggernaut.

Or it could be because Dolan sucks the air out of the room??? There actually are no big names on the panel outside of O’Malley. There is no Scola as I mentioned either. O’Malley is probably there because as I mentioned he is a personal friend of the pope. It does seem that Bergoglio places a huge emphasis on personal relationships. The Latin Americans on the panel are both personal friends of him as well.

Interesting and provocative idea to convene a privvy council to advise the Holy Father on Church matters… This is going to be a fun pontificate.

A return of lapsed Catholics? I wonder whether they “lapsed” because they no longer believed in the church’s convictions or they were disgusted by a church that failed to show the courage of their conviction.

Lew on April 13, 2013 at 4:41 PM

The vast majority of lapsed Catholics are just ordinary people who stopped going to church for no reason in particular.

You can say that the Church didn’t fulfill their needs, which may be true, but in my experience the stronger reason as that the person wasn’t terribly interested in making space in their life for God.

I know there are all sorts of lapsed Catholics, but it these type that should be first evangelized to.

Also, I’m a lapsed Catholic myself. This is mainly due to personal issues growing up Catholic. It seems that the Pharisee wing of the Catholic Church has been quite emboldened over the past decade or so and sucked the joy and meaning out of Church. Nitpicking and whining about details in the Mass obscures the big picture lessons of the Church. However, I’ve been going to Mass every Sunday since Francis was elected in support of his ideas.

A return of lapsed Catholics? I wonder whether they “lapsed” because they no longer believed in the church’s convictions or they were disgusted by a church that failed to show the courage of their conviction.

Lew on April 13, 2013 at 4:41 PM

The latter. That’s why I’m out. They are into redistribution of wealth using the top-down federal government and not into subsidiarity.

Then there is the issue of them puttng me in jail for an entire weekend because I peacefully and prayerfully protested Obozo doing the Notre Dame commencement back in 2009.

The vast majority of lapsed Catholics are just ordinary people who stopped going to church for no reason in particular.

Nessuno on April 13, 2013 at 5:18 PM

My beef is with some Catholic acquaintances I know who grew up in devout families and who in some cases had family members who were priests and religious, but who now count themselves among the liberal faction of Catholics who see nothing wrong with SSM or abortion or any of the other modern-day moral relativism that has infected the Church.

They are oh-so-attuned to being “lectured to” and being fake-outraged if a priest rightly points out to them that their views are contrary to Catholic teachings and beliefs, but they have no problem toting the liberal mantras loudly everywhere else, as if the world is just waiting to hear how evolved they are. Yet they insist on identifying as Catholic when their actions repeatedly demonstrate they do not intend to ever adhere to the beliefs of the Catholic Church.

I’ve concluded that these types of “Catholics” are much more invested in their liberal mindset than in the Catholic Church’s teachings. Certainly no one is forcing them to stay. Since they can’t seem to muster even the slightest bit of reflection to admit that maybe, just maybe, that they are wrong, I always wonder why they don’t just leave altogether.

… but in my experience the stronger reason as that the person wasn’t terribly interested in making space in their life for God.

Nessuno on April 13, 2013 at 5:18 PM

Or another possibility is that a person is too overcome by pride, which also takes up a lot of space in one’s soul.

If you distanced yourself from the Church because of its teachings, I doubt this new Pope is going to do anything to bring you back. My parish church never says anything about freedom of conscience or abortion in the Prayers of the Faithful, and yet, during a visit to Aurora Colorado, I heard those precise points mentioned several times in the Prayers.

It’s the difference between being a Southern California Catholic and a Colorado Catholic, I guess.

I can see why people might stop going — if what they hear is exactly what they hear in the secular world whose sins they secretly detest…

It would be wonderful if they actually came back for Christ, Truly Present in the Holy Eucharist and not because the new Pope rides the bus and washes women’s feet. Of course, it would have been nice if they had never left for whatever reason, since Christ was and is Truly Present in the Holy Eucharist. Honestly, compared to that, what else matters?

Lots of us left the Church because of the obsession over trivial matters like lady foot washing at the same time the so called good Catholics refused to actually listen to the teachings of the Church when it came to their day lives. Apparently, going to Church allows you to be mean and judgmental. The Vatican spent the last decade obsessing over trivial changes in the wording of the liturgy while facing a major sex abuse crisis… Theological narcissism.

The reason why I like Francis is because he changed the equation overnight. Rather than bickering over liturgy changes and women priests, he is challenging people to live their faiths in their everyday lives. Foot washing was just a symbolic act of that mission.

The Vatican spent the last decade obsessing over trivial changes in the wording of the liturgy while facing a major sex abuse crisis… Theological narcissism.

Illinidiva on April 13, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Careful that your analysis and conclusions don’t exhibit arrogance and narcissism as well.

While it may seem “trivial” to you is actually profoundly important in the way of the liturgy. Because of the misinterpretations of Vatican II, some “trivial” changes or interpretations became dangerous to the liturgy and allowed confusion and heresy to develop.

You are correct that the focus on preventing, acknowledging and correctly acting on the sex abuse crisis was lacking, but to say that it was because the Church was too obsessed with, well, correcting the liturgy is short sighted. Correcting the liturgy is what I think is and was needed to tackle the sex abuse crisis. It is exactly the bad and incorrect practice of the liturgy that allowed the abuse to foster and continue.

As for the returning “lapsed” Catholics: The Church tenets have remained in place since the day that they left. I pray that they see beyond their own selfishness that leaving the Church because of natural rather than supernatural reasons was a fallacy lest they become “lapsed” again if anything were to happen to Pope Francis.

In other words, the only reason one should leave the Church is because they disavow God and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Anything other reason is not enough.

Careful that your analysis and conclusions don’t exhibit arrogance and narcissism as well.

While it may seem “trivial” to you is actually profoundly important in the way of the liturgy. Because of the misinterpretations of Vatican II, some “trivial” changes or interpretations became dangerous to the liturgy and allowed confusion and heresy to develop

As for the returning “lapsed” Catholics: The Church tenets have remained in place since the day that they left. I pray that they see beyond their own selfishness that leaving the Church because of natural rather than supernatural reasons was a fallacy lest they become “lapsed” again if anything were to happen to Pope Francis.

If I don’t like the next guy, I reserve the right to leave again. Hopefully, Francis will be with us long enough that his ideas on the Church stick.

so called good Catholics refused to actually listen to the teachings of the Church when it came to their day lives. Apparently, going to Church allows you to be mean and judgmental. …
Illinidiva on April 13, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Can you be a little more specific in your accusations please? I never did see where you clarified how Santorum was a Pharisee, so I would like to know what specific teachings ‘good Catholics’ are refusing to listen to in their lives. How are they mean and judgmental? I assume this means that you adhere to the teachings of the Church in your every day life, so you agree that contraception is evil, remarriage after divorce is unacceptable, etc… Oh, and of course, Christ is Truly Present in the Holy Eucharist, in which case I can’t understand how you would vow to leave the Church if you don’t like the next guy we have as Pope.

Can you be a little more specific in your accusations please? I never did see where you clarified how Santorum was a Pharisee, so I would like to know what specific teachings ‘good Catholics’ are refusing to listen to in their lives. How are they mean and judgmental?

When I was twelve I got caught up with a bunch of “mean girls” at my Catholic school. These children were all the “good Catholic” types who were big at the local parish so nothing happened. In fact, the pastor said it was my fault for the situation. I suffered a nervous breakdown and eating disorder because of the entire situation. So yeah for good Catholics!!

Also, I have experienced as everyone else has the idiocy of the Santorums of the world. They tend to be the ones who whine about lady foot washing and report it to the diocese. The Santorums of the world are basically forcing others to accept their narrow version of Catholicism.

I assume this means that you adhere to the teachings of the Church in your every day life, so you agree that contraception is evil, remarriage after divorce is unacceptable, etc…

Umm… So the only teachings of the Church are about never having sex ever and only being able to go to a Traditional Latin Mass. There is nothing about being a nice person or helping the poor in there. All of Pope Francis’ sermons are about how we should act in our daily lives.

I do have a more expansive view on sex than the Church, but why I left is because of the self referential narcissism that our Holy Father pointed out before he was elected. It was all about the inner workings of the Church.. nitpicking the liturgy and arguing over the finer points of Vatican II. The Church made itself irrelevant to people’s lives.

Oh, and of course, Christ is Truly Present in the Holy Eucharist, in which case I can’t understand how you would vow to leave the Church if you don’t like the next guy we have as Pope.

If the next pope decides to go back to obsessing over the liturgy and not relating the Gospel to people’s lives, then I’ll go back to going to Church on Christmas and Easter.

Pharisee wing of the Catholic Church has been quite emboldened over the past decade or so and sucked the joy and meaning out of Church. Nitpicking and whining about details in the Mass obscures the big picture lessons of the Church. However, I’ve been going to Mass every Sunday since Francis was elected in support of his ideas

Illinidiva I’m afraid you’ll be terribly disappointed since, despite what you think, things like details about the Mass are very important and the overall trend is to reclaim the traditions of the Church by overturning the “reforms” of Vatican II. Just what “ideas” of Pope Francis are you supporting…if you are paying attention to the degree he has said anything, and its really not much, he has reaffirmed his support for the very return to the past that seemed to have driven out away to begin with…

I do have a more expansive view on sex than the Church, but why I left is because of the self referential narcissism that our Holy Father pointed out before he was elected. It was all about the inner workings of the Church.. nitpicking the liturgy and arguing over the finer points of Vatican II…If the next pope decides to go back to obsessing over the liturgy and not relating the Gospel to people’s lives, then I’ll go back to going to Church on Christmas and Easter.

Do those of us trying to return the Church to its former strength a favor…we’ll save you a seat at Christmas and Easter.

It’s about humility, both from the laity and the clergy. Pope Francis is not and has not changed anything about the Faith or the Church. The tenets remain intact.

I am sure that you truly love your faith but I would be remiss if I did not remind you that the Church was not created by man, but by Jesus Christ. All that you believe to be mere nitpicking is actually what is needed for the Church to correctly be in communion with God. If we do not obsess over the liturgy, the way in which we practice our faith and worship our Lord, what else do we have?

Charity without faith is empty. Conversely, pure knowledge of the faith is just as empty without charity. There is no greater charity, or love, than to correctly teach that which is valid, which indeed leads to our salvation.

The Second Vatican Council has reiterated this with great clarity in the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum: “For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God” (n. 12).

Pope Francis is indeed a blessing to our Church, as was his predecessors Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II. If it is Pope Francis that you celebrate and has brought you back, you should ultimately look beyond him and yourself to see that it was God working through the Holy Spirit calling to remain with Him through the liturgy of the Church, that which He created.

Cardinal O’Malley is a complete bust in Boston. Mass attendace is at an all time low.The Archdiocese of Boston is in debt to the tune of $145 million. His payroll is inflated with huge salaries for public relations hacks and ineffectual educators. He surrounds himself with Leftists like Fr. Bryan O’hehir and Obama fundraiser Jack Connors and he has more than one professional Democrat on staff running his “communications” operation.He spends much of his time in Latin America. He has no business suggesting reforms of anything. The good Cardinal needs to address the crisis in his own Archdiocese.

And you missed the point entirely.. Congrats. Did you also freak out about lady foot washing??

No, the tenets of the Catholic faith aren’t changing. I don’t get all hot and bothered about the fact that priests are all male or that birth control is against Church teachings. What I do want is a Church that relates to me and my life?

Francis is espousing a radical vision because he is demanding that people go beyond Vatican II and the nitpicking and whining that has taken place over the past fifty years. Both liberals and conservatives are going to be disappointed with this guy. He is already freaking out the conservative wing of the Church with lady foot washing, etc. (Hopefully idiots like Burke get exiled to the Vatican equivalent of Siberia.) Liberals will soon realize, however, that he isn’t going to suddenly change Church doctrine. He doesn’t care about that. Women priests and Latin Masses really don’t matter in the lives of people, especially poor people and struggling people. What he is offering is a more basic (but challenging) vision of Catholicism… It isn’t about how often you attend Mass; it is about how you live Catholicism in your daily lives.

I don’t think that anything that is going to change in terms of B16 liturgical changes. I think that Francis wants people to be happy when they attend Mass and if Latin Mass makes you happy, then he is all for that. But he isn’t going to allow a very narrow vision of Catholicism to be foisted on the rest of us.

Illinidiva I’m afraid you’ll be terribly disappointed since, despite what you think, things like details about the Mass are very important and the overall trend is to reclaim the traditions of the Church by overturning the “reforms” of Vatican II. Just what “ideas” of Pope Francis are you supporting…if you are paying attention to the degree he has said anything, and its really not much, he has reaffirmed his support for the very return to the past that seemed to have driven out away to begin with…

ironmarshal on April 13, 2013 at 10:08 PM

Lady foot washing.. Discuss. Also, his idea of a Mass is on the shorter side and very much keeping in the tradition of Vatican II. This is why traditionalists are freaking out about him. I’ve been to the websites just for fun to see what they are saying and it is pretty amusing to see the freak outs.

Do those of us trying to return the Church to its former strength a favor…we’ll save you a seat at Christmas and Easter.

ironmarshal on April 13, 2013 at 10:11 PM

I think that more has been done to return the Church to its former strength over the past month than anything in B16’s eight years. In fact, B16 drove people away from the Church.

Good, no one will ever pay any attention to any garbage you ever post again.

If the next pope decides to go back to obsessing over the liturgy and not relating the Gospel to people’s lives, then I’ll go back to going to Church on Christmas and Easter.

Illinidiva on April 13, 2013 at 9:58 PM

The Church itself may be infallible, but it is run by fallible men.

As Jesus put it:

Then addressing the crowds and his disciples Jesus said, ‘The scribes and the Pharisees occupy the chair of Moses. You must therefore do and observe what they tell you; but do not be guided by what they do, since they do not practise what they preach.’

That’s why you must have an informed conscience, to filter that which they do which is counter to what Jesus taught, and you do not get an informed conscience by attending Mass only on Easter and Christmas.

Pope have related the Gospel to people’s lives. Some are not as glad-handing as Francis is, but if you’ve read their writings (available for free on vatican.va), you understand exactly what Catholic social teaching is about in terms of a requirement for you to act, including a requirement that a just government requires proportionately from all for the services it provides (not super-proportionately from the rich as liberals in the Church desire) and that those services be provided to all if they are provided to any. The Church requires, as acts of faith, private almsgiving, acts of charity, visiting the sick and those in prison, that we not covet the goods of our neighbors, that we not steal same, that we not lie, nor murder (including the child in the womb)…

That Francis just washed the feet of prisoners brings home one of those requirements. We shall see about the others — but I have no doubt that he, like Benedict before him, will address them.

Lady foot washing.. Discuss. Also, his idea of a Mass is on the shorter side and very much keeping in the tradition of Vatican II. This is why traditionalists are freaking out about him. I’ve been to the websites just for fun to see what they are saying and it is pretty amusing to see the freak outs.

I’m a traditionalist — which means that I think that all of the forms of worship promulgated by the Church are correct — and I’m certainly not freaking out.

There was nothing unCatholic about Vatican II — and those Traditionalists you mention are of the type who’ve already left the Church.

These people left the Church long ago, given what they consider the important aspects of worship. That they still consider themselves Catholic, and still comment on Catholic websites, is painful to see. They are the people who find fault with mutable forms of worship (from a Catholic historical standpoint) and feel that Vatican II was a Protestant invasion of Catholicism — a heresy, if you will. If anything, they themselves are in one sense a Protestant sect — for the Catholic Church has always taught that one can baptise with one drop of water — the spit from one’s mouth if necessary — and does not require full immersion for the Holy Spirit to come. In fact, the Church even teaches that Baptism is possible in some circumstances even without water — seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_of_desire

Instead of welcoming back lapsed Catholics, the majority of what I see here are arrogant, dismissive, unchristian comments. This is in sharp contrast to what Jesus taught. Wasn’t Christ endlessly forgiving?

I’ve been on the fence about whether I wanted to return to the Church. Thanks for helping me to make my decision.

Instead of welcoming back lapsed Catholics, the majority of what I see here are arrogant, dismissive, unchristian comments. This is in sharp contrast to what Jesus taught. Wasn’t Christ endlessly forgiving?

I’ve been on the fence about whether I wanted to return to the Church. Thanks for helping me to make my decision.

NavyMustang on April 14, 2013 at 6:22 AM

You know, the Prodigal Son returned home and received a fattened calf. He didn’t stand around complaining that no one was offering him a fattened calf if only he would come home.

There is more to being Catholic in your daily lives than opposing abortion and gay marriage. I think that this is something that we all need to strive toward.. For instance, not being intolerant and judgmental toward others and thinking that one is a “good Catholic” because you attend the correct Mass at the correct days and follow the correct rubrics. Look at the flaws in one’s own life rather than passing judgment on others.

You know, the Prodigal Son returned home and received a fattened calf. He didn’t stand around complaining that no one was offering him a fattened calf if only he would come home.

Kensington on April 14, 2013 at 12:52 PM

And the Good Son was reproached by The Father for complaining. Being intolerant toward others and unforgiving toward others is a huge flaw.

I think that more has been done to return the Church to its former strength over the past month than anything in B16′s eight years. In fact, B16 drove people away from the Church.

Illinidiva on April 14, 2013 at 3:13 AM

Really? What exactly did B16 do to drive people away from the Church? If one truly believes, then it would take more than a few liturgical changes to drive one away from the Faith. I like B16 and Pope Francis but my love for the Church doesn’t depend on the guy wearing the red shoes.

Really? What exactly did B16 do to drive people away from the Church? If one truly believes, then it would take more than a few liturgical changes to drive one away from the Faith. I like B16 and Pope Francis but my love for the Church doesn’t depend on the guy wearing the red shoes.

PackerBronco on April 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM

How about paraphrasing it this way.. B16 did nothing to help wayward Catholics return to the Church. He came off as strict and uncompromising to a lot of people and that is a turn off.

I don’t think that anyone is celebrating anything. It is basically another Francis’ extended honeymoon article and provides more evidence that he is the media’s new public figure who can do no wrong. (And considering the bad press that the Church has received over the past years, a month of glowing press is a good thing.

How about paraphrasing it this way.. B16 did nothing to help wayward Catholics return to the Church. He came off as strict and uncompromising to a lot of people and that is a turn off.

Illinidiva on April 14, 2013 at 1:51 PM

I’ve seen that interpretation but in reading his writings, he came off to me as a kind and thoughtful man. Certainly Francis is going to be a better figure for the media. B16 is essentially an introvert which can strike some people as cold and uncaring, which in the case of Benedict is both unfair and untrue.

I’ve seen that interpretation but in reading his writings, he came off to me as a kind and thoughtful man. Certainly Francis is going to be a better figure for the media. B16 is essentially an introvert which can strike some people as cold and uncaring, which in the case of Benedict is both unfair and untrue.

PackerBronco on April 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Apparently, people who have personally met him say that he is a very nice and shy man. And in certain situations he did come off well. I thought that the Bush administration did a nice job with the 2008 U.S. trip and that was probably the high point of his papacy. However, I am on record as saying that Ratzinger was a bad fit for the job. He would have really preferred to have been writing books and teaching theology in Bavaria; hopefully he can get back to that in retirement. He clearly didn’t like the public aspects of the job as an introvert. (Francis, on the other hand, seems like he is having a grand old time.) I think that his public persona would have been forgiven if he was really God’s Rottweiler and knocked heads in the Vatican and cleaned up shop. However, he was really non-confrontational and tended to punt everything to committee. I think that the Curia officials knew that Benedict really didn’t have the strong personality needed to reform the Church, which is why they were such huge advocates for him in 2005.

That being said. I do appreciate Benedict’s resignation and hope that this becomes standard practice if a pope becomes to ill to function. The Church suffered greatly during the last five or so years of JPII’s papacy because of his illness. Perhaps only a traditionalist like Benedict could resign and kick the office into the 21st century.

Umm… So the only teachings of the Church are about never having sex ever and only being able to go to a Traditional Latin Mass. There is nothing about being a nice person or helping the poor in there. All of Pope Francis’ sermons are about how we should act in our daily lives.

Illinidiva on April 13, 2013 at 9:58 PM

Since this was a response to my questions I feel compelled to point out that NOWHERE have I or anyone else in the Church said anything about never having sex ever. What a ridiculous accusation to try and distort the teaching on sexual morality, which is quite clear and binding on all Catholics. Likewise, nowhere have I ever said one must go to a Traditional Latin Mass to be a ‘good Catholic’ and nowhere have I seen other Catholics do so. As unclesmrgl said, those who do are outside communion with the Church too. It would be strange if I had said that since I do not go to a Traditional Latin Mass myself. I do love the Tridentine Rite, and would never resent it as you seem to for some reason, and was blessed to attend an indult TLM a number of years ago in Virginia. While I was raised post VII, I understand that it is the Mass of the vast majority of the Saints, and I really don’t understand the animosity many Catholics have toward it, but I am very blessed today to have a parish where the priest is dedicated to celebrate a very beautiful and reverent OF Mass in keeping with the guidance provided by beloved Benedict XVI. And that you would attack our beloved former Pope in ways that verge on calumny, is truly unChristian, when he has given his life, and love to Christ and in service to Christ’s Church. And he most certainly did not punt anything. He did a great deal to combat and clean up the filth, and Pope Francis has acknowledged it when he says he intends to continue the work that Benedict started. And I would suggest you read some of the encyclicals promulgated by Benedict XVI and the great wealth of books written by him as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. I would bet that if the world lasts long enough, he will some day be declared a doctor of the Church; his writings are so clear, insightful, and beautiful. He has always preached the Truth, with Charity, and just because you didn’t like hearing it doesn’t mean he is the one with the problem. I thank God for providing such an honest and loving shepherd for His Church at a time when we were so desperately in need of it, and I thank Him for Pope Francis, and pray that he leads us with the same wisdom and strength as Pope Benedict did.

It is very interesting that you judge others so harshly because they care about the Liturgy when you admittedly reject clear and timeless teachings of the Church. You act as though because someone thinks the way we worship Our Lord, the Savior of the world, is important enough to do properly, they are wicked Pharisees, projecting onto them a hypocrisy that more times than not will not be there. How do you know everyone who cares about what you seem to consider unimportant details don’t feed the poor or do all those things the Church teaches that YOU find more important than some of the other things the Church also teaches? Clearly you would enjoy going to church with people who choose to act in their daily lives as you see fit and leave all those things you disapprove of out, but some of us think it is possible to believe ALL that the Church teaches, including that the Sacred Liturgy is Sacred and that it needs to be done according to the liturgical norms. They are norms for a reason, and priests and liturgists who like to jazz em up a bit are doing so out of arrogance and pride, yet you seem to think that’s perfectly fine and inclusive or welcoming. Well, it has been a disaster. It is no wonder so many do not believe in the Real Presence of our Lord when we have removed the Tabernacle, bow to an empty ‘table’ and yet hardly know to genuflect when Christ is physically Present, and parade a book around with more reverence than they have when approaching the Blessed Sacrament. Yes, I know the Bible is the Word of God, but that is when we hear or read the Word and take it to heart and try to live it. But many churches hold the actual book up and treat it like Muslims treat the koran, as if the paper and leather binding is what is Holy, yet take Our Lord, Body, Soul and Divinity, the Word Made Flesh, into their hands with the same respect they would give a potato chip. That’s a problem, and Benedict XVI, God bless him, worked to correct the abuses that have led to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass being treated as a social affair around a table with lots of back slapping and self congratulating songs.

And as to him being strict and uncompromising, not doing anything to bring wayward Catholics back into communion with the Church, if telling people the Truth is uncompromising, then I’ll grant that he was, but I think telling people the Truth when what they are doing is killing them, is the most loving thing a person could do. What good does it do for people to come and partake of the Eucharist when they continue living in their sin? It only compounds it, as they ‘eat condemnation to themselves.’ That is serious business. Had he compromised the truth, he would have jeopardized not only wayward Catholic souls but his OWN. There is no compromise with evil. I only wish I’d had priests telling me the Truth all my life with the same clarity as Pope Benedict has. It might have saved me a lot of regret or at least made it harder for me to rationalize my own sin. And yes, it was my fault, mea culpa…I knew, but if any of them had at least acted like confession was remotely important, much less a requirement, which it IS, and Pope Francis, God bless him, has stressed it’s importance, I have no doubt it would have made me think twice about my sinful ways. So yes, I thank God for Pope Benedict XVI. I pray he is greatly blessed and when his time is up here, that his reward will be very great in Heaven. The way people revile him for standing firm in the truth, I’d bet it will be. /defense of beloved Benedict XVI.

And if that comes across as arrogant, dismissive, or unChristian, I can’t help it. Some seem to think anything short of approving their rejection of Church Teaching and Tradition is a form of arrogance and self-righteousness. That actually telling the Truth is divisive. Well, actually it is. Jesus said Himself He did not come to bring peace, but the sword. If you are not coming back to the Church because you love Jesus or you decide against it because you don’t like that people would dare to say what the Church actually teaches, then maybe you need to reconsider why you would want to come back in the first place. It isn’t a picnic. It is serious business. Honestly, so many Catholics and lapsed Catholics today are more like the Sanhedrin from today’s reading, who persecuted the apostles for preaching what Jesus told them to teach. If you don’t like hearing it, you should ask yourself why. And if you seek out a parish full of people and a priest, or a Pope, who will only tickle your ears, you should ask yourself what good that is to you. Come back to the Church because it is the Church founded by Christ, and because He said ‘Do this as a commemoration of Me.” and because “Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.” That is serious business. It is a matter of life and death. God have mercy on us, and give us holy priests!

I’m a really flawed person.. I’ll admit it. However, I have no use for hypocrites who think that they are better and holier than others.

Illinidiva on April 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

Hey, that’s fine. I’m as flawed as we come. Just lay off with the “YOU’RE INTOLERANT!!!11″ approach, because all that sneering you’re doing about “Pharisees” sure has a whiff of superior presumption to it.

I’m a really flawed person.. I’ll admit it. However, I have no use for hypocrites who think that they are better and holier than others.

Illinidiva on April 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

Hey, that’s fine. I’m as flawed as we come. Just lay off with the “YOU’RE INTOLERANT!!!11″ approach, because all that sneering you’re doing about “Pharisees” sure has a whiff of superior presumption to it.

Kensington on April 14, 2013 at 5:45 PM

And is quite a slick way to try to shame people into silence. Only those who aren’t flawed are allowed to make any statements on Truth, you see. How convenient for dissenters. I suppose because we are all flawed and have fallen, we are supposed to sit down and shut up while anyone and everyone else spews their dissent with immunity, lest we be called out as hypocrites.

Hey, that’s fine. I’m as flawed as we come. Just lay off with the “YOU’RE INTOLERANT!!!11″ approach, because all that sneering you’re doing about “Pharisees” sure has a whiff of superior presumption to it.

1. I’m sure that there are people who are both traditional Catholics who practice their faith every day.. My main argument is the Church is wrapped up in itself. Both the liberals and conservatives. I think that Bergoglio was going for a pox on both your houses play. He was basically shaming the people on both sides to stop squabbling.

2. I think that both of the types of Masses are valid. I go to a very liberal Spanish Mass which I’m sure that you’d disapprove of. (Nobody kneels.) However, I’m fine with you going to a TLM. I think that Pope Francis thinks both forms are valid. He wants people to feel happy and joyful over the Mass and feel God in their lives. However, I don’t like the fact that the traditionalists were demanding that all Masses must be their way or the high way. I feel close to God in the Mass I go to. It is joyful and beautiful and please don’t demand that it changes.

3. There are valid reasons why people left the Church over the last decades. The Church really did an awesome job alienating people from it with all the scandals. So walk a minute in people’s shoes before you judge. I surely hope you aren’t this judgmental with people who walk in the door of your local parish.

4. I think that it is valid to criticize the popes. They are, after all, human. I think Benedict is a very complex character. I just read John Thavis’ book that Ed recommended and I thought that Benedict came off better than his blessed predecessor. Benedict was more interested in combating sexual abuse than John Paul. He went after some of the worst cases (Maciel) pretty hard. I also appreciate the gift Benedict gave us by resigning. I think that John Paul should have resigned as well. He spent most of the last years of his papacy not well. I remember seeing him at the end of 1997 (we went to Rome for my 16th B-day) and he was not well then. The Church suffered because he didn’t step down.

However, each person has their own talents and I don’t think that B16 was suited for his role. He was an introvert and didn’t like the public role. He came off as a scold and that turned people away from his message. (I’ve never read his books but have heard they are very good, but a disaffected Catholic isn’t going to pick up a theological text.) He wasn’t the tough administrator that everyone was expecting and let people walk all over him. Bergoglio is much more suited to the public role. (In contrast, I don’t think that Bergoglio would be good at what Ratzinger is good at.. theological dissertations.)

Your problems with B16 might well relate to your attempt to construct your own god. When someone says people are too strict (for example, teenagers saying this about their parents), well, usually it’s not that the people are too strict, it’s that the message is so correct that the messenger must die, so to speak.

Why is this pope fooled by his nemesis, the Cow of Argentina? She hates his guts and undermined him, always. Now she uses his status to ‘save’ herself. He should shun her, always.

Schadenfreude on April 13, 2013 at 4:18 PM

WHat are you talking about? Cristina K is making her best to look like a supporter of Bergoglio in an election year. How is he “fooled” by her pretending, back in Argentina, that she never had a problem with him? His opposition to her is well known over there as is the fact that she is trying her best to look tolerant in an election year.

BTW, if Pope Francis had been “fooled” into believing her, why did he reject several requests for a private meeting with her?

Your problems with B16 might well relate to your attempt to construct your own god. When someone says people are too strict (for example, teenagers saying this about their parents), well, usually it’s not that the people are too strict, it’s that the message is so correct that the messenger must die, so to speak.

unclesmrgol on April 14, 2013 at 7:58 PM

I’m sure he is a lovely man, but the Church is sort of a disaster area right now.

You don’t appear to have an ounce of self-awareness.

Kensington on April 14, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Umm… exactly who is talking?? Try this thing called not criticizing others and you won’t get some push back. However, since you go to a TLM, I guess that presumes that you are holier than the rest of us and therefore get to criticize those who might be turned off from the Church by the fact that they were covering up child sexual abuse.

Umm… exactly who is talking?? Try this thing called not criticizing others and you won’t get some push back. However, since you go to a TLM, I guess that presumes that you are holier than the rest of us and therefore get to criticize those who might be turned off from the Church by the fact that they were covering up child sexual abuse.

Illinidiva on April 14, 2013 at 10:34 PM

The Catholic position as far as I’m aware is “go, and sin no more.” Pointing out someone else’s sins means you are concerned for the fate of their immortal soul, not that you are holier than them.

Catholics should indeed criticize when they find error in the action of others. If Kermit Gosnell were to chastize you for murder he would still be correct, even if he is otherwise a moral monster. His hypocrisy is irrelevant to the sinfulness of the actions you are committing.

All fall short of the glory of God, but people who fall more short than others should not be silenced as if their glimmer of God’s objectively knowable truth is less valid because of their particular state.

Oh, and the sexual abuse thing: The Catholic Church has done more to end institutionalized abuse in their institution than say Duke University or any of the secular places where the behavior is commonplace and covered up. I know it’s a popular whipping post but I really am pretty damn tired of people pretending the Church hasn’t done anything about it. They’ve vastly enhanced and expanded their training programs for catechists, priests, and others with exposure to children, sought out the victims to try and make right the wrongs, and faced incessant, mindless public ridicule in the face of complete secular ignorance of these facts.

What is it you want, Carninal Bernard Law’s severed head on a pike? Will that satisfy you? Will anything satisfy you?

The actions the guilty clergy did are considered deeply, soul-endangering wrong by the faith. The Church admitted error in handling the cases that were brought to them. The Church has made pro-active steps to heal the victims and prevent future victims. Were this a confession, I think they have adequately confessed their sins and sought a penance to bring about truly heartfelt change and right the wrongs.